Retelling: Vova Pyatsky and Smadar Pyatsky (based on the translations of the suttas published on Theravada.ru and SuttaCentral.net)
Russian Version: 23. Паяси Сутта | Три Ваджры
Translation to English: Roni Sherman and Marina Sherman
At the time that Kassapa was wandering with the community of monks in the kingdom of Kosala, one of the royal principalities of this country was ruled by prince Payasi, who denied the value of virtue. Once, seeing that brahmin-householders had decided to visit Kassapa, prince Payasi joined them in order to argue and establish his reputation as a free-thinker. Addressing Kasapa, Payasi says that there is no other world, no self-born beings (gods), no consequences for bad and good deeds.
Wishing to turn Payasi’s mind to sublime and wonderful phenomena, Kassapa asked the prince about the great marvelous luminaries — the Sun and the Moon. Do they belong to the human world or another? Are they not gods? Payasi, however, says that his observations in the earthly world lead him to lack of faith, and Kassapa begins to question Payasi about how he arrived at his view.
Payasi’s arguments and Kassapa’s objections
Arguments about deceased relatives — bad and good
Payasi says that he repeatedly visited dying relatives: some were of bad temper and behaviour, others — of virtuous. Payasi asked all those who were dying to come to him after death and tell him: is there another world, did the sinful relatives end up in hell, and the pious in heavenly appanages? They all promised him to come and tell, but nobody came, even those who always kept their promises during life.
Kasappa objects about relatives who had perpetrated bad deeds in the following way: prince, imagine that a person destined to execution, to torture, asks the executioners: “Hold on, I must briefly step out at the request of a relative”. Will the executioners let him step out? After all, the lower realms are deprived of freedom and are full of suffering and are like a prison.
Kassapa objects regarding relatives who were born in good destinies as follows: “Prince, imagine a man living in a pit with filth. This man has been taken out of this pit, washed, anointed with fragrant oils, dressed in beautiful clothes. Will this man descend once again into the pit with filth? After all, to beings in the realms of gods, the earthly realm appears as nothing other than a stinking pit. Even those who overcame their disgust and would have wanted to come would not be able to since in the abodes of the gods time flows differently: in one of their days, many, many years in the visible world may pass.
The argument that hermits continue their earthly life and do not leave it for the sake of the heavenly world
Prince Payasi, however, persists in his opinion. Why don’t holy hermits, who see other worlds and gods, end their earthly existence in order to reach the heavenly worlds more quickly? On the contrary, they try to maintain earthly life.
Kassapa objects with a parable: a brahmin had two wives. He had a teenage son from his first wife, while the second wife was pregnant. And it so happened that the brahmin suddenly died. Then his son demanded the entire inheritance for himself. The second wife, however, asked him to wait until she gave birth: if she had a girl, the young brahmin would receive everything; however if she had a boy, he too is entitled to a share of the inheritance. However the young brahmin insisted on receiving the entire inheritance immediately. Then the woman went and cut her belly open with a sword in order to check who she had: a girl or a boy? So both she and her fetus died from her foolish haste.
There is purpose in the life of virtuous people: because as long as they live, their good deeds grow.
The argument about the executed thieves
Payasi persits. He describes the different kinds of executions his executioners execute caught thieves with. And whatever is the kind of execution, the prince could not see the jiva (living being) leaving the body.
Kassapa objects: prince, it so happens that during an afternoon nap you see beautiful groves and palaces, walk around in them and enjoy yourself, is that not so? Meanwhile, you, while sleeping, are guarded by hunchbacks, dwarves and young girls. But none of them see you wandering. This example shows that living people, looking with ordinary eyes, do not see how a living being leaves the body.
The argument about comparing the weight of a living and dead body
Payasi said: the living body is lighter, while a dead body is heavier, it is more difficult to lift. If there were some being in the body, then with death, the body should become lighter and not heavier.
Kassapa’s objection: if we take an iron ball and heat it to a glow, then, filled with heat and wind, it will be noticeably lighter, more malleable and softer; once it cools down, we will feel it to be heavier, not malleable and harder. And a living being, like heat and wind, makes the body lighter.
The argument about the cessation of the activity of the senses
Payasi said: “Look, a dead man has the same eyes and ears and other senses, but he does not see, does not hear. So, while there is perception of the senses, there is life — if there are no senses and there is no perception — there is no life. Therefore there are no senses and perceptions after death.
Kassapa objects with a parable: a trumpeter with a conch came to a village. Blowing into the conch, he gathered all the people. But the people in that place were wild and undeveloped. They asked the trumpeter for the conch and placed it in a prominent place, telling it: “Blow, Conch! Blow!” But without the trumpeter, the conch made no sound.
The argument about the lack of jiva in any part of the body
Payasi said: in no part or layer of the body, such as the skin, muscles, bones, or bone marrow can one see a living being. Therefore I do not believe in another world, in self-born divine beings, in the consequences of bad and good deeds.
Kassapa objects with a parable: a hermit-fire worshipper raised a boy. Once he left the boy to watch over a fire, but the boy got carried away and the fire went out. The boy tried to rekindle the fire again: he split a twig and another one — the fire did not erupt. The boy split each twig into parts and those parts into others — nevertheless the fire did not erupt. The hermit returned and explained to the boy that the fire is neither in the twigs nor in their parts; the fire engulfs them and then they burn.
Payasi chooses to stick to his views out of stubbornness
Payasi, even though his arguments no longer satisfy him, says that everybody knows what his views are. How can he change them now? Therefore he will stick to them.
Kassapa persuades Payasi: be careful, prince, that these views do not bring you long-term troubles. He gives a parable about two caravanners who met, in the desert, a red-eyed, wet, lotus-adorned yaksha riding on a wagon whose wheels were smeared with liquid mud. The yaksha told them that it had rained in the desert, there was water, a lot of grass had grown, let them throw away their supplies of straw and water, do not tire the oxen, and travel lightly. One of the caravan drivers listened to the yaksha and traveled lightly, while the second drove slowly, not believing the yaksha. And the one who rode quickly did not find water either at the first stop, or at the second, or at the third — until he and his entire caravan perished in the desert. The second caravan driver reached his destination safely. Kassapa warns Payasi that one must reach the other world in the right way, having the necessary reserves of good deeds and understanding.
Kassapa’s parables on the need to reject obsolete views
Kassapa’s parable about the man with the dung
Regarding the habit of holding on to old views, Kassapa tells the following parable: One man found a pile of dry dung and decided to bring this pile to feed his pigs. He took this dung in his clothes and carried it. However, on the way he was caught in the rain, the dung got wet and leaked. So the man did not bring the dung, and was completely covered in it.
Kassapa’s parable of the gambler
Kassapa urges Payasi not to hold harmful views either out of pride or for gain. He tells a parable about two gamblers. One gambler was a cheater and whenever his throw was unsuccessful, he swallowed his dice. Then the second gambler, noticing this, asked him for the dice for a short time and smeared them with poison. After that, he returned the dice. The game began, the cheater made an unsuccessful throw and secretly swallowed the dice, meeting his demise. Therefore Kassapa urges Payasi not to be afraid to admit his past misconceptions. For he who hides his misconceptions is like this gambler who swallowed poisonous dice.
The parable about the hemp and linen
As Payasi continues to persist, Kassapa teaches him another parable which encourages him to change his views. Once upon a time there were two comrades who found an abandoned village. They saw a pile of hemp there, and they collected some of it. They went on and saw a hemp thread. One of them exchanged the hemp for the hemp thread (after all, hemp is needed for this thread), but the other did not want to change his load, saying that he had packed it well on his shoulders, and had become used to it. They went on and found sackcloth… linen yarn… canvas… The first one exchanged his load for something more valuable each time, while the second one clung to his usual old load. So they returned to their village — one with a valuable load of linen, the other with gross hemp.
Payasi expresses admiration for Kassapa’s parables
Payasi admired Kassapa’s parables and said that he would have agreed long ago, but wanted to listen to the hermit’s beautiful instructions. After this, he takes refuge in the Triple Gem.
The Further History of Payasi
Later, the sutta tells, Payasi was negligent in accumulating virtue, and was reborn among the lower spirits without having accumulated merit.
Conclusion
The story of the conversation between Kassapa and Payasi is a collection of arguments of the supporters of nihilism and the teachings given against these arguments. However, the issue here is not about the possibility of conclusively and convincingly refuting nihilistic views. After all, only the direct experience of Awakening makes the true true for a person, and the false — false. It is not for nothing that even after taking Refuge, Payasi was unable to understand the deep meaning of the accumulation of virtue. Kassapa's explanations only softened the prince's disposition, but did not change his state radically, because deep understanding can only arise as a result of the already existing accumulations of virtue. We recommend comparing the story of Payasi with the story of King Ajasatta (see Samanñaphala Sutta, Digha Nikaya 2)
The main meaning of Kassapa's instructions comes down to two positions: 1) only by purifying the mind, by curbing oneself, can a person see the truth about the heavenly worlds, about gods, about the consequences of bad and good deeds; 2) even without seeing the truth, a person can abandon obviously harmful views if he understands that he supports them solely because of pride and inertia.